Am I the only person in the world that thinks Microsoft's Intelligent Message Filter sucks?

Is it just me or is Microsofts Intelligent Message Filter 2003 just about the worst thing out there for anti-spam? I've googled high and low for some backing but everyone seems to think it's great. Is Microsoft paying these people off our what? I've worked with IMF in many different orgs and it is pathetic and 100% incompetent. It has a nack for catching all the good mail as spam, while leaving obvious phishing and spam in the inbox.

This is what I must know - if you think IMF is bad too - please tell me your horror stories. Capture rates and false positive rates would be great to know. I just want to make sure I'm not the only person in the world who thinks this stuff is a joke!!!

Who is Participating?
SembeeConnect With a Mentor Commented:
No spam filter is 100% effective. IMF is the same as all the others.

In my experience it depends on the type of email that you receive.

For example, one of my clients is a finance company, who deal with mortgages, loans etc - ie the kind of services that you get spam for all the time.
As such, we went through every spam filtering product in the market, including IMF and outsourced providers and couldn't find a product that didn't capture too much valid email.
Eventually we approached one of the major outsourced spam filtering services who built a customised solution for the client.

Have you attempted to tune IMF? No one has said that it is perfect for everyone out of the box.
Microsoft also claim that it is the only thing that they use for filtering their own email.

Probably the reason that most people rave about it is because it is free and is better than nothing.

Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.